ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/xDissertation/Introduction.tex
(Generate patch)

Comparing trunk/xDissertation/Introduction.tex (file contents):
Revision 3336 by xsun, Wed Jan 30 16:01:02 2008 UTC vs.
Revision 3365 by xsun, Mon Mar 10 21:52:50 2008 UTC

# Line 1 | Line 1
1   \chapter{\label{chap:intro}INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND}
2 +
3 + \section{Background on the Problem\label{In:sec:pro}}
4 + Phospholipid molecules are the primary topic of this dissertation
5 + because of their critical role as the foundation of biological
6 + membranes. Lipids, when dispersed in water, self assemble into bilayer
7 + structures. The phase behavior of lipid bilayers have been explored
8 + experimentally~\cite{Cevc87}, however, a complete understanding of the
9 + mechanism for self-assembly has not been achieved.
10 +
11 + \subsection{Ripple Phase\label{In:ssec:ripple}}
12 + The $P_{\beta'}$ {\it ripple phase} of lipid bilayers, named from the
13 + periodic buckling of the membrane, is an intermediate phase which is
14 + developed either from heating the gel phase $L_{\beta'}$ or cooling
15 + the fluid phase $L_\alpha$. Although the ripple phase has been
16 + observed in several
17 + experiments~\cite{Sun96,Katsaras00,Copeland80,Meyer96,Kaasgaard03},
18 + the physical mechanism for the formation of the ripple phase has never been
19 + explained and the microscopic structure of the ripple phase has never
20 + been elucidated by experiments. Computational simulation is a perfect
21 + tool to study the microscopic properties for a system. However, the
22 + large length scale the ripple structure and the long time scale
23 + of the formation of the ripples are crucial obstacles to performing
24 + the actual work. The principal ideas explored in this dissertation are
25 + attempts to break the computational task up by
26 + \begin{itemize}
27 + \item Simplifying the lipid model.
28 + \item Improving algorithm for integrating the equations of motion.
29 + \end{itemize}
30 + In chapters~\ref{chap:mc} and~\ref{chap:md}, we use a simple point
31 + dipole model and a coarse-grained model to perform the Monte Carlo and
32 + Molecular Dynamics simulations respectively, and in
33 + chapter~\ref{chap:ld}, we develop a Langevin Dynamics algorithm which
34 + excludes the explicit solvent to improve the efficiency of the
35 + simulations.
36 +
37 + \subsection{Lattice Model\label{In:ssec:model}}
38 + The gel-like characteristic of the ripple phase makes it feasible to
39 + apply a lattice model to study the system. It is claimed that the
40 + packing of the lipid molecules in ripple phase is
41 + hexagonal~\cite{Cevc87}. The popular $2$ dimensional lattice models,
42 + {\it i.e.}, the Ising, $X-Y$, and Heisenberg models, show {\it
43 + frustration} on triangular lattices. The Hamiltonian of the systems
44 + are given by
45 + \begin{equation}
46 + H =
47 +  \begin{cases}
48 +    -J \sum_n \sum_{n'} s_n s_n' & \text{Ising}, \\
49 +    -J \sum_n \sum_{n'} \vec s_n \cdot \vec s_{n'} & \text{$X-Y$ and
50 + Heisenberg},
51 +  \end{cases}
52 + \end{equation}
53 + where $J$ has non zero value only when spins $s_n$ ($\vec s_n$) and
54 + $s_{n'}$ ($\vec s_{n'}$) are the nearest neighbours.
55 + \begin{figure}
56 + \centering
57 + \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/inFrustration.pdf}
58 + \caption{Frustration on a triangular lattice, the spins are
59 + represented by arrows. No matter which direction the spin on the top
60 + of triangle points to, the Hamiltonain of the system goes up.}
61 + \label{Infig:frustration}
62 + \end{figure}
63 + Figure~\ref{Infig:frustration} shows an illustration of the
64 + frustration on a triangular lattice. When $J < 0$, the spins want to
65 + be anti-aligned, The direction of the spin on top of the triangle will
66 + make the energy go up no matter which direction it picks, therefore
67 + infinite possibilities for the packing of spins induce what is known
68 + as ``complete regular frustration'' which leads to disordered low
69 + temperature phases.
70 +
71 + The lack of translational degree of freedom in lattice models prevents
72 + their utilization in models for surface buckling which would
73 + correspond to ripple formation. In chapter~\ref{chap:mc}, a modified
74 + lattice model is introduced to tackle this specific situation.
75 +
76 + \section{Overview of Classical Statistical Mechanics\label{In:sec:SM}}
77 + Statistical mechanics provides a way to calculate the macroscopic
78 + properties of a system from the molecular interactions used in
79 + computational simulations. This section serves as a brief introduction
80 + to key concepts of classical statistical mechanics that we used in
81 + this dissertation. Tolman gives an excellent introduction to the
82 + principles of statistical mechanics~\cite{Tolman1979}. A large part of
83 + section~\ref{In:sec:SM} will follow Tolman's notation.
84 +
85 + \subsection{Ensembles\label{In:ssec:ensemble}}
86 + In classical mechanics, the state of the system is completely
87 + described by the positions and momenta of all particles. If we have an
88 + $N$ particle system, there are $6N$ coordinates ($3N$ position $(q_1,
89 + q_2, \ldots, q_{3N})$ and $3N$ momenta $(p_1, p_2, \ldots, p_{3N})$)
90 + to define the instantaneous state of the system. Each single set of
91 + the $6N$ coordinates can be considered as a unique point in a $6N$
92 + dimensional space where each perpendicular axis is one of
93 + $q_{i\alpha}$ or $p_{i\alpha}$ ($i$ is the particle and $\alpha$ is
94 + the spatial axis). This $6N$ dimensional space is known as phase
95 + space. The instantaneous state of the system is a single point in
96 + phase space. A trajectory is a connected path of points in phase
97 + space. An ensemble is a collection of systems described by the same
98 + macroscopic observables but which have microscopic state
99 + distributions. In phase space an ensemble is a collection of a set of
100 + representive points. A density distribution $\rho(q^N, p^N)$ of the
101 + representive points in phase space describes the condition of an
102 + ensemble of identical systems. Since this density may change with
103 + time, it is also a function of time. $\rho(q^N, p^N, t)$ describes the
104 + ensemble at a time $t$, and $\rho(q^N, p^N, t')$ describes the
105 + ensemble at a later time $t'$. For convenience, we will use $\rho$
106 + instead of $\rho(q^N, p^N, t)$ in the following disccusion. If we
107 + normalize $\rho$ to unity,
108 + \begin{equation}
109 + 1 = \int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N \rho,
110 + \label{Ineq:normalized}
111 + \end{equation}
112 + then the value of $\rho$ gives the probability of finding the system
113 + in a unit volume in the phase space.
114 +
115 + Liouville's theorem describes the change in density $\rho$ with
116 + time. The number of representive points at a given volume in the phase
117 + space at any instant can be written as:
118 + \begin{equation}
119 + \label{Ineq:deltaN}
120 + \delta N = \rho~\delta q_1 \delta q_2 \ldots \delta q_N \delta p_1 \delta p_2 \ldots \delta p_N.
121 + \end{equation}
122 + To calculate the change in the number of representive points in this
123 + volume, let us consider a simple condition: the change in the number
124 + of representive points in $q_1$ axis. The rate of the number of the
125 + representive points entering the volume at $q_1$ per unit time is:
126 + \begin{equation}
127 + \label{Ineq:deltaNatq1}
128 + \rho~\dot q_1 \delta q_2 \ldots \delta q_N \delta p_1 \delta p_2 \ldots \delta p_N,
129 + \end{equation}
130 + and the rate of the number of representive points leaving the volume
131 + at another position $q_1 + \delta q_1$ is:
132 + \begin{equation}
133 + \label{Ineq:deltaNatq1plusdeltaq1}
134 + \left( \rho + \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial q_1} \delta q_1 \right)\left(\dot q_1 +
135 + \frac{\partial \dot q_1}{\partial q_1} \delta q_1 \right)\delta q_2 \ldots \delta q_N \delta p_1 \delta p_2 \ldots \delta p_N.
136 + \end{equation}
137 + Here the higher order differentials are neglected. So the change of
138 + the number of the representive points is the difference of
139 + eq.~\ref{Ineq:deltaNatq1} and eq.~\ref{Ineq:deltaNatq1plusdeltaq1}, which
140 + gives us:
141 + \begin{equation}
142 + \label{Ineq:deltaNatq1axis}
143 + -\left(\rho \frac{\partial {\dot q_1}}{\partial q_1} + \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial q_1} \dot q_1 \right)\delta q_1 \delta q_2 \ldots \delta q_N \delta p_1 \delta p_2 \ldots \delta p_N,
144 + \end{equation}
145 + where, higher order differetials are neglected. If we sum over all the
146 + axes in the phase space, we can get the change of the number of
147 + representive points in a given volume with time:
148 + \begin{equation}
149 + \label{Ineq:deltaNatGivenVolume}
150 + \frac{d(\delta N)}{dt} = -\sum_{i=1}^N \left[\rho \left(\frac{\partial
151 + {\dot q_i}}{\partial q_i} + \frac{\partial
152 + {\dot p_i}}{\partial p_i}\right) + \left( \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial
153 + q_i} \dot q_i + \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial p_i} \dot p_i\right)\right]\delta q_1 \delta q_2 \ldots \delta q_N \delta p_1 \delta p_2 \ldots \delta p_N.
154 + \end{equation}
155 + From Hamilton's equation of motion,
156 + \begin{equation}
157 + \frac{\partial {\dot q_i}}{\partial q_i} = - \frac{\partial
158 + {\dot p_i}}{\partial p_i},
159 + \label{Ineq:canonicalFormOfEquationOfMotion}
160 + \end{equation}
161 + this cancels out the first term on the right side of
162 + eq.~\ref{Ineq:deltaNatGivenVolume}. If both sides of
163 + eq.~\ref{Ineq:deltaNatGivenVolume} are divided by $\delta q_1 \delta q_2
164 + \ldots \delta q_N \delta p_1 \delta p_2 \ldots \delta p_N$, then we
165 + can derive Liouville's theorem:
166 + \begin{equation}
167 + \left( \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} \right)_{q, p} = -\sum_{i} \left(
168 + \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial
169 + q_i} \dot q_i + \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial p_i} \dot p_i \right).
170 + \label{Ineq:simpleFormofLiouville}
171 + \end{equation}
172 + This is the basis of statistical mechanics. If we move the right
173 + side of equation~\ref{Ineq:simpleFormofLiouville} to the left, we
174 + will obtain
175 + \begin{equation}
176 + \left( \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} \right)_{q, p} + \sum_{i} \left(
177 + \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial
178 + q_i} \dot q_i + \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial p_i} \dot p_i \right)
179 + = 0.
180 + \label{Ineq:anotherFormofLiouville}
181 + \end{equation}
182 + It is easy to note that the left side of
183 + equation~\ref{Ineq:anotherFormofLiouville} is the total derivative of
184 + $\rho$ with respect of $t$, which means
185 + \begin{equation}
186 + \frac{d \rho}{dt} = 0,
187 + \label{Ineq:conservationofRho}
188 + \end{equation}
189 + and the rate of density change is zero in the neighborhood of any
190 + selected moving representive points in the phase space.
191 +
192 + The condition of the ensemble is determined by the density
193 + distribution. If we consider the density distribution as only a
194 + function of $q$ and $p$, which means the rate of change of the phase
195 + space density in the neighborhood of all representive points in the
196 + phase space is zero,
197 + \begin{equation}
198 + \left( \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} \right)_{q, p} = 0.
199 + \label{Ineq:statEquilibrium}
200 + \end{equation}
201 + We may conclude the ensemble is in {\it statistical equilibrium}. An
202 + ensemble in statistical equilibrium often means the system is also in
203 + macroscopic equilibrium. If $\left( \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t}
204 + \right)_{q, p} = 0$, then
205 + \begin{equation}
206 + \sum_{i} \left(
207 + \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial
208 + q_i} \dot q_i + \frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial p_i} \dot p_i \right)
209 + = 0.
210 + \label{Ineq:constantofMotion}
211 + \end{equation}
212 + If $\rho$ is a function only of some constant of the motion, $\rho$ is
213 + independent of time. For a conservative system, the energy of the
214 + system is one of the constants of the motion. Here are several
215 + examples: when the density distribution is constant everywhere in the
216 + phase space,
217 + \begin{equation}
218 + \rho = \mathrm{const.}
219 + \label{Ineq:uniformEnsemble}
220 + \end{equation}
221 + the ensemble is called {\it uniform ensemble}.  Another useful
222 + ensemble is called {\it microcanonical ensemble}, for which:
223 + \begin{equation}
224 + \rho = \delta \left( H(q^N, p^N) - E \right) \frac{1}{\Sigma (N, V, E)}
225 + \label{Ineq:microcanonicalEnsemble}
226 + \end{equation}
227 + where $\Sigma(N, V, E)$ is a normalization constant parameterized by
228 + $N$, the total number of particles, $V$, the total physical volume and
229 + $E$, the total energy. The physical meaning of $\Sigma(N, V, E)$ is
230 + the phase space volume accessible to a microcanonical system with
231 + energy $E$ evolving under Hamilton's equations. $H(q^N, p^N)$ is the
232 + Hamiltonian of the system. The Gibbs entropy is defined as
233 + \begin{equation}
234 + S = - k_B \int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N \rho \ln [C^N \rho],
235 + \label{Ineq:gibbsEntropy}
236 + \end{equation}
237 + where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant and $C^N$ is a number which
238 + makes the argument of $\ln$ dimensionless, in this case, it is the
239 + total phase space volume of one state. The entropy in microcanonical
240 + ensemble is given by
241 + \begin{equation}
242 + S = k_B \ln \left(\frac{\Sigma(N, V, E)}{C^N}\right).
243 + \label{Ineq:entropy}
244 + \end{equation}
245 + If the density distribution $\rho$ is given by
246 + \begin{equation}
247 + \rho = \frac{1}{Z_N}e^{-H(q^N, p^N) / k_B T},
248 + \label{Ineq:canonicalEnsemble}
249 + \end{equation}
250 + the ensemble is known as the {\it canonical ensemble}. Here,
251 + \begin{equation}
252 + Z_N = \int d \vec q~^N \int_\Gamma d \vec p~^N  e^{-H(q^N, p^N) / k_B T},
253 + \label{Ineq:partitionFunction}
254 + \end{equation}
255 + which is also known as {\it partition function}. $\Gamma$ indicates
256 + that the integral is over all the phase space. In the canonical
257 + ensemble, $N$, the total number of particles, $V$, total volume, and
258 + $T$, the temperature are constants. The systems with the lowest
259 + energies hold the largest population. According to maximum principle,
260 + the thermodynamics maximizes the entropy $S$,
261 + \begin{equation}
262 + \begin{array}{ccc}
263 + \delta S = 0 & \mathrm{and} & \delta^2 S < 0.
264 + \end{array}
265 + \label{Ineq:maximumPrinciple}
266 + \end{equation}
267 + From Eq.~\ref{Ineq:maximumPrinciple} and two constrains of the canonical
268 + ensemble, {\it i.e.}, total probability and average energy conserved,
269 + the partition function is calculated as
270 + \begin{equation}
271 + Z_N = e^{-A/k_B T},
272 + \label{Ineq:partitionFunctionWithFreeEnergy}
273 + \end{equation}
274 + where $A$ is the Helmholtz free energy. The significance of
275 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:entropy} and~\ref{Ineq:partitionFunctionWithFreeEnergy} is
276 + that they serve as a connection between macroscopic properties of the
277 + system and the distribution of the microscopic states.
278 +
279 + There is an implicit assumption that our arguments are based on so
280 + far. A representive point in the phase space is equally to be found in
281 + any same extent of the regions. In other words, all energetically
282 + accessible states are represented equally, the probabilities to find
283 + the system in any of the accessible states is equal. This is called
284 + equal a {\it priori} probabilities.
285 +
286 + \subsection{Statistical Average\label{In:ssec:average}}
287 + Given the density distribution $\rho$ in the phase space, the average
288 + of any quantity ($F(q^N, p^N$)) which depends on the coordinates
289 + ($q^N$) and the momenta ($p^N$) for all the systems in the ensemble
290 + can be calculated based on the definition shown by
291 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:statAverage1}
292 + \begin{equation}
293 + \langle F(q^N, p^N, t) \rangle = \frac{\int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N
294 + F(q^N, p^N, t) \rho}{\int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N \rho}.
295 + \label{Ineq:statAverage1}
296 + \end{equation}
297 + Since the density distribution $\rho$ is normalized to unity, the mean
298 + value of $F(q^N, p^N)$ is simplified to
299 + \begin{equation}
300 + \langle F(q^N, p^N, t) \rangle = \int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N F(q^N,
301 + p^N, t) \rho,
302 + \label{Ineq:statAverage2}
303 + \end{equation}
304 + called {\it ensemble average}. However, the quantity is often averaged
305 + for a finite time in real experiments,
306 + \begin{equation}
307 + \langle F(q^N, p^N) \rangle_t = \lim_{T \rightarrow \infty}
308 + \frac{1}{T} \int_{t_0}^{t_0+T} F(q^N, p^N, t) dt.
309 + \label{Ineq:timeAverage1}
310 + \end{equation}
311 + Usually this time average is independent of $t_0$ in statistical
312 + mechanics, so Eq.~\ref{Ineq:timeAverage1} becomes
313 + \begin{equation}
314 + \langle F(q^N, p^N) \rangle_t = \lim_{T \rightarrow \infty}
315 + \frac{1}{T} \int_{0}^{T} F(q^N, p^N, t) dt
316 + \label{Ineq:timeAverage2}
317 + \end{equation}
318 + for an infinite time interval.
319 +
320 + {\it ergodic hypothesis}, an important hypothesis from the statistical
321 + mechanics point of view, states that the system will eventually pass
322 + arbitrarily close to any point that is energetically accessible in
323 + phase space. Mathematically, this leads to
324 + \begin{equation}
325 + \langle F(q^N, p^N, t) \rangle = \langle F(q^N, p^N) \rangle_t.
326 + \label{Ineq:ergodicity}
327 + \end{equation}
328 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:ergodicity} validates the Monte Carlo method which we will
329 + discuss in section~\ref{In:ssec:mc}. An ensemble average of a quantity
330 + can be related to the time average measured in the experiments.
331 +
332 + \subsection{Correlation Function\label{In:ssec:corr}}
333 + Thermodynamic properties can be computed by equillibrium statistical
334 + mechanics. On the other hand, {\it Time correlation function} is a
335 + powerful method to understand the evolution of a dynamic system in
336 + non-equillibrium statistical mechanics. Imagine a property $A(q^N,
337 + p^N, t)$ as a function of coordinates $q^N$ and momenta $p^N$ has an
338 + intial value at $t_0$, at a later time $t_0 + \tau$ this value is
339 + changed. If $\tau$ is very small, the change of the value is minor,
340 + and the later value of $A(q^N, p^N, t_0 +
341 + \tau)$ is correlated to its initial value. Howere, when $\tau$ is large,
342 + this correlation is lost. The correlation function is a measurement of
343 + this relationship and is defined by~\cite{Berne90}
344 + \begin{equation}
345 + C(t) = \langle A(0)A(\tau) \rangle = \lim_{T \rightarrow \infty}
346 + \frac{1}{T} \int_{0}^{T} dt A(t) A(t + \tau).
347 + \label{Ineq:autocorrelationFunction}
348 + \end{equation}
349 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:autocorrelationFunction} is the correlation function of a
350 + single variable, called {\it autocorrelation function}. The defination
351 + of the correlation function for two different variables is similar to
352 + that of autocorrelation function, which is
353 + \begin{equation}
354 + C(t) = \langle A(0)B(\tau) \rangle = \lim_{T \rightarrow \infty}
355 + \frac{1}{T} \int_{0}^{T} dt A(t) B(t + \tau),
356 + \label{Ineq:crosscorrelationFunction}
357 + \end{equation}
358 + and called {\it cross correlation function}.
359 +
360 + In section~\ref{In:ssec:average} we know from Eq.~\ref{Ineq:ergodicity}
361 + the relationship between time average and ensemble average. We can put
362 + the correlation function in a classical mechanics form,
363 + \begin{equation}
364 + C(t) = \langle A(0)A(\tau) \rangle = \int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N A(t) A(t + \tau) \rho(q, p)
365 + \label{Ineq:autocorrelationFunctionCM}
366 + \end{equation}
367 + and
368 + \begin{equation}
369 + C(t) = \langle A(0)B(\tau) \rangle = \int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N A(t) B(t + \tau)
370 + \rho(q, p)
371 + \label{Ineq:crosscorrelationFunctionCM}
372 + \end{equation}
373 + as autocorrelation function and cross correlation function
374 + respectively. $\rho(q, p)$ is the density distribution at equillibrium
375 + in phase space. In many cases, the correlation function decay is a
376 + single exponential
377 + \begin{equation}
378 + C(t) \sim e^{-t / \tau_r},
379 + \label{Ineq:relaxation}
380 + \end{equation}
381 + where $\tau_r$ is known as relaxation time which discribes the rate of
382 + the decay.
383 +
384 + \section{Methodolody\label{In:sec:method}}
385 + The simulations performed in this dissertation are branched into two
386 + main catalog, Monte Carlo and Molecular Dynamics. There are two main
387 + difference between Monte Carlo and Molecular Dynamics simulations. One
388 + is that the Monte Carlo simulation is time independent, and Molecular
389 + Dynamics simulation is time involved. Another dissimilar is that the
390 + Monte Carlo is a stochastic process, the configuration of the system
391 + is not determinated by its past, however, using Moleuclar Dynamics,
392 + the system is propagated by Newton's equation of motion, the
393 + trajectory of the system evolved in the phase space is determined. A
394 + brief introduction of the two algorithms are given in
395 + section~\ref{In:ssec:mc} and~\ref{In:ssec:md}. An extension of the
396 + Molecular Dynamics, Langevin Dynamics, is introduced by
397 + section~\ref{In:ssec:ld}.
398 +
399 + \subsection{Monte Carlo\label{In:ssec:mc}}
400 + Monte Carlo algorithm was first introduced by Metropolis {\it et
401 + al.}.~\cite{Metropolis53} Basic Monte Carlo algorithm is usually
402 + applied to the canonical ensemble, a Boltzmann-weighted ensemble, in
403 + which the $N$, the total number of particles, $V$, total volume, $T$,
404 + temperature are constants. The average energy is given by substituding
405 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:canonicalEnsemble} into Eq.~\ref{Ineq:statAverage2},
406 + \begin{equation}
407 + \langle E \rangle = \frac{1}{Z_N} \int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N E e^{-H(q^N, p^N) / k_B T}.
408 + \label{Ineq:energyofCanonicalEnsemble}
409 + \end{equation}
410 + So are the other properties of the system. The Hamiltonian is the
411 + summation of Kinetic energy $K(p^N)$ as a function of momenta and
412 + Potential energy $U(q^N)$ as a function of positions,
413 + \begin{equation}
414 + H(q^N, p^N) = K(p^N) + U(q^N).
415 + \label{Ineq:hamiltonian}
416 + \end{equation}
417 + If the property $A$ is only a function of position ($ A = A(q^N)$),
418 + the mean value of $A$ is reduced to
419 + \begin{equation}
420 + \langle A \rangle = \frac{\int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N A e^{-U(q^N) / k_B T}}{\int d \vec q~^N \int d \vec p~^N e^{-U(q^N) / k_B T}},
421 + \label{Ineq:configurationIntegral}
422 + \end{equation}
423 + The kinetic energy $K(p^N)$ is factored out in
424 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:configurationIntegral}. $\langle A
425 + \rangle$ is a configuration integral now, and the
426 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:configurationIntegral} is equivalent to
427 + \begin{equation}
428 + \langle A \rangle = \int d \vec q~^N A \rho(q^N).
429 + \label{Ineq:configurationAve}
430 + \end{equation}
431 +
432 + In a Monte Carlo simulation of canonical ensemble, the probability of
433 + the system being in a state $s$ is $\rho_s$, the change of this
434 + probability with time is given by
435 + \begin{equation}
436 + \frac{d \rho_s}{dt} = \sum_{s'} [ -w_{ss'}\rho_s + w_{s's}\rho_{s'} ],
437 + \label{Ineq:timeChangeofProb}
438 + \end{equation}
439 + where $w_{ss'}$ is the tansition probability of going from state $s$
440 + to state $s'$. Since $\rho_s$ is independent of time at equilibrium,
441 + \begin{equation}
442 + \frac{d \rho_{s}^{equilibrium}}{dt} = 0,
443 + \label{Ineq:equiProb}
444 + \end{equation}
445 + which means $\sum_{s'} [ -w_{ss'}\rho_s + w_{s's}\rho_{s'} ]$ is $0$
446 + for all $s'$. So
447 + \begin{equation}
448 + \frac{\rho_s^{equilibrium}}{\rho_{s'}^{equilibrium}} = \frac{w_{s's}}{w_{ss'}}.
449 + \label{Ineq:relationshipofRhoandW}
450 + \end{equation}
451 + If
452 + \begin{equation}
453 + \frac{w_{s's}}{w_{ss'}} = e^{-(U_s - U_{s'}) / k_B T},
454 + \label{Ineq:conditionforBoltzmannStatistics}
455 + \end{equation}
456 + then
457 + \begin{equation}
458 + \frac{\rho_s^{equilibrium}}{\rho_{s'}^{equilibrium}} = e^{-(U_s - U_{s'}) / k_B T}.
459 + \label{Ineq:satisfyofBoltzmannStatistics}
460 + \end{equation}
461 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:satisfyofBoltzmannStatistics} implies that
462 + $\rho^{equilibrium}$ satisfies Boltzmann statistics. An algorithm,
463 + shows how Monte Carlo simulation generates a transition probability
464 + governed by \ref{Ineq:conditionforBoltzmannStatistics}, is schemed as
465 + \begin{enumerate}
466 + \item\label{Initm:oldEnergy} Choose an particle randomly, calculate the energy.
467 + \item\label{Initm:newEnergy} Make a random displacement for particle,
468 + calculate the new energy.
469 +  \begin{itemize}
470 +     \item Keep the new configuration and return to step~\ref{Initm:oldEnergy} if energy
471 + goes down.
472 +     \item Pick a random number between $[0,1]$ if energy goes up.
473 +        \begin{itemize}
474 +           \item Keep the new configuration and return to
475 + step~\ref{Initm:oldEnergy} if the random number smaller than
476 + $e^{-(U_{new} - U_{old})} / k_B T$.
477 +           \item Keep the old configuration and return to
478 + step~\ref{Initm:oldEnergy} if the random number larger than
479 + $e^{-(U_{new} - U_{old})} / k_B T$.
480 +        \end{itemize}
481 +  \end{itemize}
482 + \item\label{Initm:accumulateAvg} Accumulate the average after it converges.
483 + \end{enumerate}
484 + It is important to notice that the old configuration has to be sampled
485 + again if it is kept.
486 +
487 + \subsection{Molecular Dynamics\label{In:ssec:md}}
488 + Although some of properites of the system can be calculated from the
489 + ensemble average in Monte Carlo simulations, due to the nature of
490 + lacking in the time dependence, it is impossible to gain information
491 + of those dynamic properties from Monte Carlo simulations. Molecular
492 + Dynamics is a measurement of the evolution of the positions and
493 + momenta of the particles in the system. The evolution of the system
494 + obeys laws of classical mechanics, in most situations, there is no
495 + need for the count of the quantum effects. For a real experiment, the
496 + instantaneous positions and momenta of the particles in the system are
497 + neither important nor measurable, the observable quantities are
498 + usually a average value for a finite time interval. These quantities
499 + are expressed as a function of positions and momenta in Melecular
500 + Dynamics simulations. Like the thermal temperature of the system is
501 + defined by
502 + \begin{equation}
503 + \frac{1}{2} k_B T = \langle \frac{1}{2} m v_\alpha \rangle,
504 + \label{Ineq:temperature}
505 + \end{equation}
506 + here $m$ is the mass of the particle and $v_\alpha$ is the $\alpha$
507 + component of the velocity of the particle. The right side of
508 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:temperature} is the average kinetic energy of the
509 + system. A simple Molecular Dynamics simulation scheme
510 + is:~\cite{Frenkel1996}
511 + \begin{enumerate}
512 + \item\label{Initm:initialize} Assign the initial positions and momenta
513 + for the particles in the system.
514 + \item\label{Initm:calcForce} Calculate the forces.
515 + \item\label{Initm:equationofMotion} Integrate the equation of motion.
516 +  \begin{itemize}
517 +     \item Return to step~\ref{Initm:calcForce} if the equillibrium is
518 + not achieved.
519 +     \item Go to step~\ref{Initm:calcAvg} if the equillibrium is
520 + achieved.
521 +  \end{itemize}
522 + \item\label{Initm:calcAvg} Compute the quantities we are interested in.
523 + \end{enumerate}
524 + The initial positions of the particles are chosen as that there is no
525 + overlap for the particles. The initial velocities at first are
526 + distributed randomly to the particles, and then shifted to make the
527 + momentum of the system $0$, at last scaled to the desired temperature
528 + of the simulation according Eq.~\ref{Ineq:temperature}.
529 +
530 + The core of Molecular Dynamics simulations is step~\ref{Initm:calcForce}
531 + and~\ref{Initm:equationofMotion}. The calculation of the forces are
532 + often involved numerous effort, this is the most time consuming step
533 + in the Molecular Dynamics scheme. The evaluation of the forces is
534 + followed by
535 + \begin{equation}
536 + f(q) = - \frac{\partial U(q)}{\partial q},
537 + \label{Ineq:force}
538 + \end{equation}
539 + $U(q)$ is the potential of the system. Once the forces computed, are
540 + the positions and velocities updated by integrating Newton's equation
541 + of motion,
542 + \begin{equation}
543 + f(q) = \frac{dp}{dt} = \frac{m dv}{dt}.
544 + \label{Ineq:newton}
545 + \end{equation}
546 + Here is an example of integrating algorithms, Verlet algorithm, which
547 + is one of the best algorithms to integrate Newton's equation of
548 + motion. The Taylor expension of the position at time $t$ is
549 + \begin{equation}
550 + q(t+\Delta t)= q(t) + v(t) \Delta t + \frac{f(t)}{2m}\Delta t^2 +
551 +        \frac{\Delta t^3}{3!}\frac{\partial^3 q(t)}{\partial t^3} +
552 +        \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^4)
553 + \label{Ineq:verletFuture}
554 + \end{equation}
555 + for a later time $t+\Delta t$, and
556 + \begin{equation}
557 + q(t-\Delta t)= q(t) - v(t) \Delta t + \frac{f(t)}{2m}\Delta t^2 -
558 +        \frac{\Delta t^3}{3!}\frac{\partial^3 q(t)}{\partial t^3} +
559 +        \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^4) ,
560 + \label{Ineq:verletPrevious}
561 + \end{equation}
562 + for a previous time $t-\Delta t$. The summation of the
563 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:verletFuture} and~\ref{Ineq:verletPrevious} gives
564 + \begin{equation}
565 + q(t+\Delta t)+q(t-\Delta t) =
566 +        2q(t) + \frac{f(t)}{m}\Delta t^2 + \mathcal{O}(\Delta t^4),
567 + \label{Ineq:verletSum}
568 + \end{equation}
569 + so, the new position can be expressed as
570 + \begin{equation}
571 + q(t+\Delta t) \approx
572 +        2q(t) - q(t-\Delta t) + \frac{f(t)}{m}\Delta t^2.
573 + \label{Ineq:newPosition}
574 + \end{equation}
575 + The higher order of the $\Delta t$ is omitted.
576 +
577 + Numerous technics and tricks are applied to Molecular Dynamics
578 + simulation to gain more efficiency or more accuracy. The simulation
579 + engine used in this dissertation for the Molecular Dynamics
580 + simulations is {\sc oopse}, more details of the algorithms and
581 + technics can be found in~\cite{Meineke2005}.
582 +
583 + \subsection{Langevin Dynamics\label{In:ssec:ld}}
584 + In many cases, the properites of the solvent in a system, like the
585 + lipid-water system studied in this dissertation, are less important to
586 + the researchers. However, the major computational expense is spent on
587 + the solvent in the Molecular Dynamics simulations because of the large
588 + number of the solvent molecules compared to that of solute molecules,
589 + the ratio of the number of lipid molecules to the number of water
590 + molecules is $1:25$ in our lipid-water system. The efficiency of the
591 + Molecular Dynamics simulations is greatly reduced.
592 +
593 + As an extension of the Molecular Dynamics simulations, the Langevin
594 + Dynamics seeks a way to avoid integrating equation of motion for
595 + solvent particles without losing the Brownian properites of solute
596 + particles. A common approximation is that the coupling of the solute
597 + and solvent is expressed as a set of harmonic oscillators. So the
598 + Hamiltonian of such a system is written as
599 + \begin{equation}
600 + H = \frac{p^2}{2m} + U(q) + H_B + \Delta U(q),
601 + \label{Ineq:hamiltonianofCoupling}
602 + \end{equation}
603 + where $H_B$ is the Hamiltonian of the bath which equals to
604 + \begin{equation}
605 + H_B = \sum_{\alpha = 1}^{N} \left\{ \frac{p_\alpha^2}{2m_\alpha} +
606 + \frac{1}{2} m_\alpha \omega_\alpha^2 q_\alpha^2\right\},
607 + \label{Ineq:hamiltonianofBath}
608 + \end{equation}
609 + $\alpha$ is all the degree of freedoms of the bath, $\omega$ is the
610 + bath frequency, and $\Delta U(q)$ is the bilinear coupling given by
611 + \begin{equation}
612 + \Delta U = -\sum_{\alpha = 1}^{N} g_\alpha q_\alpha q,
613 + \label{Ineq:systemBathCoupling}
614 + \end{equation}
615 + where $g$ is the coupling constant. By solving the Hamilton's equation
616 + of motion, the {\it Generalized Langevin Equation} for this system is
617 + derived to
618 + \begin{equation}
619 + m \ddot q = -\frac{\partial W(q)}{\partial q} - \int_0^t \xi(t) \dot q(t-t')dt' + R(t),
620 + \label{Ineq:gle}
621 + \end{equation}
622 + with mean force,
623 + \begin{equation}
624 + W(q) = U(q) - \sum_{\alpha = 1}^N \frac{g_\alpha^2}{2m_\alpha
625 + \omega_\alpha^2}q^2,
626 + \label{Ineq:meanForce}
627 + \end{equation}
628 + being only a dependence of coordinates of the solute particles, {\it
629 + friction kernel},
630 + \begin{equation}
631 + \xi(t) = \sum_{\alpha = 1}^N \frac{-g_\alpha}{m_\alpha
632 + \omega_\alpha} \cos(\omega_\alpha t),
633 + \label{Ineq:xiforGLE}
634 + \end{equation}
635 + and the random force,
636 + \begin{equation}
637 + R(t) = \sum_{\alpha = 1}^N \left( g_\alpha q_\alpha(0)-\frac{g_\alpha}{m_\alpha
638 + \omega_\alpha^2}q(0)\right) \cos(\omega_\alpha t) + \frac{\dot
639 + q_\alpha(0)}{\omega_\alpha} \sin(\omega_\alpha t),
640 + \label{Ineq:randomForceforGLE}
641 + \end{equation}
642 + as only a dependence of the initial conditions. The relationship of
643 + friction kernel $\xi(t)$ and random force $R(t)$ is given by
644 + \begin{equation}
645 + \xi(t) = \frac{1}{k_B T} \langle R(t)R(0) \rangle
646 + \label{Ineq:relationshipofXiandR}
647 + \end{equation}
648 + from their definitions. In Langevin limit, the friction is treated
649 + static, which means
650 + \begin{equation}
651 + \xi(t) = 2 \xi_0 \delta(t).
652 + \label{Ineq:xiofStaticFriction}
653 + \end{equation}
654 + After substitude $\xi(t)$ into Eq.~\ref{Ineq:gle} with
655 + Eq.~\ref{Ineq:xiofStaticFriction}, {\it Langevin Equation} is extracted
656 + to
657 + \begin{equation}
658 + m \ddot q = -\frac{\partial U(q)}{\partial q} - \xi \dot q(t) + R(t).
659 + \label{Ineq:langevinEquation}
660 + \end{equation}
661 + The applying of Langevin Equation to dynamic simulations is discussed
662 + in Ch.~\ref{chap:ld}.

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines